Send to

Choose Destination
See comment in PubMed Commons below
J Arthroplasty. 2007 Oct;22(7):1054-9.

Comparison of robotic-assisted and conventional manual implantation of a primary total knee arthroplasty.

Author information

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Dongguk University International Hospital, Ilsan, South Korea.


This study was aimed to compare robotic-assisted implantation of a total knee arthroplasty with conventional manual implantation. We controlled, randomized, and reviewed 72 patients for total knee arthroplasty assigned to undergo either conventional manual implantation (excluding navigation-assisted implantation cases) of a Zimmer LPS prosthesis (Zimmer, Warsaw, Ind) (30 patients: group 1) or robotic-assisted implantation of such a prosthesis (32 patients: group 2). The femoral flexion angle (gamma angle) and tibial angle (delta angle) in the lateral x-ray of group 1 were 4.19 +/- 3.28 degrees and 89.7 +/- 1.7 degrees, and those of group 2 were 0.17 +/- 0.65 degrees and 85.5 +/- 0.92 degrees. The major complications were from improper small skin incision during a constraint attempt of minimally invasive surgery and during bulk fixation frame pins insertion. Robotic-assisted technology had definite advantages in terms of preoperative planning, accuracy of the intraoperative procedure, and postoperative follow-up, especially in the femoral flexion angle (gamma angle) and tibial flexion angle (delta angle) in the lateral x-ray, and in the femoral flexion angle (alpha angle) in the anteroposterior x-ray. But a disadvantage was the high complication rate in early stage.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science
    Loading ...
    Support Center